Creation: Part I

Having a minor in biology I have maintained an interest in earth sciences. Following are insights from keen scientific minds on the subject.
There are several scientific societies made up of members with advanced degrees from prestigious institutions. “I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist” by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek quotes some of these scholars. In this worthy read many scientist speak on the topic of origins. They range from creationist, to theist, and atheists. Note these insights by them on the topic of the Teleological Argument. “Telos” is Greek for design.
Isaac Newton wrote, “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
Cosmologist Ed Harrison said, “The fine-tuning of the universe proves prima facie evidence of deistic design.”
Microbiologist Chandra Wickramasinghe admits Darwinists are acting on blind faith when it comes to spontaneous generation of life and observed, “The emergence of life from a primordial soup on the Earth is merely an article of faith that scientists are finding hard to shed. Indeed all attempts to create life from non-life, starting with Pasteur, have been unsuccessful.”
Einstein said, “God doesn’t play dice with the universe.”
Phillip Gold, referring to the orderly design of the universe concluded, “God plays Scrabble.”
Though not a scientist, former astronaut John Glenn looked out of the Space Shuttle Discovery and remarked, “To look out at this kind of creation and not believe in God is to me impossible.”
Michael Denton, a respected atheist adds, “The complexity of the simplest known type of cell is so great that it is impossible to accept that such an object could have been thrown together suddenly by some kind of freakish, vastly improbable event. Such an occurrence would be indistinguishable from a miracle.”
Design indicates a designer. Consider the design of a single one-cell amoeba. Darwinist Richard Dawkins, professor of zoology at Oxford University, acknowledges the message found in just the cell nucleus of a tiny amoeba is more that the 30 volumes of the Encyclopedia Britannica combined. The entire amoeba has as much information in its DNA as 1,000 complete set of the Encyclopedia Britannica. That is detail intricate design yet naturalistic
evolutionists claim it came about by spontaneous generation.
Design is seen in one protein molecule which has about 100 amino acids. Michael Behe has calculated that the probability of life arising by chance from nonliving chemicals would be like a blindfolded man finding one marked grain of sand in the Sahara Desert three times in a row. One protein molecule is not life. To get life, would require about 200 protein molecules together.
Physicist and information scientist Hubert Yockey is honest in admitting, “The belief that life on earth arose spontaneously from nonliving matter, is simply a matter of faith in strict reductionism and is based entirely on ideology.” He concludes Darwinist are as religious as the “religious” and live by faith.
The creation evolution debate is not about religion verses science or Bible versus science —- it is about good science verses bad science and creation is increasingly proving to be good science. Many honest evolutionist admit flaws in their philosophy but like Darwinist Richard Lewontin of Harvard insist that because of having “a prior commitment to materialism …we cannot allow a divine foot in the door.”